Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Lowest recoil rifle & caliber for deer & bear

6.5 Grendel and 6 mm ARC would be good rounds to look into. I haven't spent any time with the ARC but have spent a good bit of time shooting the Grendel recently. Even in a light weight rifle the recoil is very low.

You can reduce felt recoil of any round just by adding weight to the rifle. Reduced recoil loads as well. Don't rule out any of the standard short actions rounds if you don't mind using a heavier rifle. That said, if you want a light/handy rifle, the Grendel or ARC in a Howa mini would be tough to beat.

Get a 270, put a brake on it, you will have something then. I had a 300 win mag that came with one. It was like shooting a .223

Great question. Looking forward to responses.

The effective range you will be hunting is a key variable. That said, I would look into the 6.5 Grendel.

Reduced recoil loads can be plenty accurate and bullet performance doing 2500 fps will be the same wether it was fired from a 300 Savage or a 30/06.

I've had two surgeries on my shooting shoulder. So over the past 4-5 years have used most all of the smaller cartridges. Never had any trouble with killing deer. Use a good bullet and stick it in the right spot.

I've used the .223, 22-250, 6mm TCU, 6x47 Rem, 25-45 Sharps, 25-35 Win, 6.5 Grendel, 7mm TCU, 30 Carbine, .327 Federal, 357 Mag, 350 Legend and several others.

Use the recoil calculator. https://shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php

For me anything under 11 Ft.lbs is comfortable.

The past year I've used a Tikka T3x lite chamber in .277 Wolverine to take several nice bucks. Also used a Henry All-Weather 45 Colt with Barnes 225 XPB.

I've sent my Tikka in to have a new barrel installed, chambered in 300 Ham'r. Time to try something different.

I guess it depends on the bullet you have in mind. I've been present when several deer and hogs have been shot with 120-140gr 7mm bullets at muzzle velocities from 2200 to 2650 fps. Stuff bled and died just fine, without any unusually long death runs or such. A 100yd impact with such a load is likely not much different than a 250-300yd impact with the same bullet loaded to full power in a .280Rem, and most of us would say that the .280 is plenty of gun for such a shot. Next to placement, bullet choice and impact velocity matter most. I've also shot full power stuff with comparable recoil, mostly being 6mm and .257 chamberings, and I really can't say I saw a ton of difference on meat versus the reduced 7mm-08 loads. Trajectory might be a different issue, of course, should that factor in.

My boys have dropped deer, including some decent-sized bucks, in their tracks every time with .243 Hornady Lite 87gr SST loads. They produce a muzzle velocity of 2,577 fps out of their youth model rifle with a 20” barrel. Very little recoil.

I know some bears in Pennsylvania can get pretty big. For me personally, I would rather face one of those with a .308 Win or bigger. My DPMS semi-auto .308 recoils, I think, a lot less than a bolt .308. Semi-autos, especially gas-operated versions, seem to round off the recoil pressure curve by spreading out the recoil over time.

Of course, if you put a can on any standard deer/bear rifle, you’re taking away a lot of recoil too. I’ve just never needed to do that.

I know a lot of low-recoiling cartridges will work fine on bear in many circumstances, but, if I were you, I would consider getting something like a semi-auto .308 with or without a can before finally deciding to go hunt bear under-gunned.

You can also put a can on a semi-auto .308 and then have even less recoil....(grin).

My brother shot this hog a few weeks back when we were hunting together. He turned to me and said, "this gun has no recoil..... like practically none". He was rather surprised. It is a heavy gun now though, with all the NV optics and stuff.

Another side of this coin, maybe you could not worry about the cartridge so much...and consider adding weight of the rifle. If you play with the variables in recoil formula a little...it soon becomes apparent that adding weight to the firearm is the single most effective way to recoil reduction.

This. Or just download it. Run a 90 or 100 grain bullet.
Or a .243 with a 100 and loaded down. My 9 year old boy shoot them no broblem without a brake.

I vote Suppressed 6.5cm for deer.

No experience with bears…

The last shot I fired at game was on 12/27/19, a .35 Whelen at a cow elk. On 1/2/20 a bad vehicle wreck put an end to shooting (Dr.s orders) for a year. Then a heart attack on 2/20 sidelined me again and on 3/22 cancer. Damn Dr.s keep saying it's too soon to resume shooting anything. On the day of the vehicle accident, I was on my way to the range to do last minute checks on a 7x57 that I planned to try on an elk hunt that I was scheduled to start in two days. Idiot in a dump truck cost me that hunt and the time lag on shooting, not to mention a badly bruise heart. Doc thinks that led to the heart attack. The doc did say to shoot rifles with mild recoil so as to not disturb the stents or the port for the chemo. When the weather cleans up a bit, I'll take a few rifles to the range. Probably my .223, .243, .257 Robt., and 7x57 Mauser. Probably the 7x57 will have to be my limit for a long time and will have to decide whether to stick to wimpy factory loads or will I be able to comfortably handle the 7-08 level handloads? I'm hoping I can do the 7-08 level loads and try one more elk hunt before the passing time comes. We'll just have to see.
PJ

The Ruger American in 6.5 Grendel would make a nice balance of killing power and very modest recoil.

This would likely be the "easy button" considering today's rifle and ammo choices/availability. I've shot one back to back with a non-suppressed rifle and there was a sizeable difference. A medium-weight 6.5CM with a can is rather gentle.

My suppressed 6.5cm Alpine recoils about as much as my mini 223, unsupressed. Cans are crazy that way.

I think if you can develop your own throttled down load, that's the best way to approach reducing the power of a larger chambering. My experience with factory-made "reduced recoil" loads has not been good. Remington's version for a 300WM literally tumbled from a Rem 700 and Hornady's version (I think it was called Hornady Lite?) was all over the place in a 7mm-08 that grouped multiple, full-power loads well. A sample size of two might not be the best way to decide, but the reduced stuff is generally scarce and thus very expensive... I'd want to know for sure how it was going to group before investing in multiple boxes.

I like the 30-30 for this

That isn’t what I was talking about. I was thinking more along the lines of a 243 shooting a 95gr ballistic tip at 3,000+ fps or something downloaded to the same recoil. That’s why I said for killing. I understand such and such bullet going 2,500 fps is the same performance no matter what chambering.

I for one admire the man for saying he hates recoil and wants something to hunt with that doesn’t have a lot of it. Too many good low recoiling options to shoot something you don’t like. I wouldn’t care if a bunch of strangers on the internet approved or not. I bet several people that have replied on this thread kill less than 2-3 deer a year. Plenty who shoot half a dozen plus do it year after year with centerfire 22’s and 6mm’s. I wouldn’t make it any harder or more uncomfortable than it has to be.

Thank you. I was curious if loading down would have much advantage over him just shooting something like a 6 creedmoor wide open.

I agree a supressed 6.5 creedmoor(mines a 260) is pretty comfortable to shoot. The 6mm version is even less if that matters. I might suggest getting a 1-8” twist tikka 223 and a 6.5 creedmoor. Same rifle same scope. Use both and see what you prefer.

Remington shows a 1-8” for the new 223’s. You could go with a 700 if you hate a tikka.